It seems Emma moved around a bit after leaving Maplecroft. The 1910 census has her living as a boarder in Providence, Rhode Island with the Gardner family. Her having so many living companions, and the fact that she was away for two weeks visiting friends at the time of the murders, makes me wonder if Emma was not the backwards wall flower so many imagine her to be.

We see on her death certificate that she had senility of some kind. She had a lot of money. There were no nursing homes to speak of back then. Perhaps she went from place to place living with people and paying well, these people looked after her. She didn't buy a house either b/c she didn't want to be alone, or didn't trust herself to be alone. maybe?

It's possible. But in my opinion I do not believe she suffered from senility for the entire time after she left Maplecroft. There were also homes for the aged back then. They were called Homes for the Aged, Homes for Old Ladies, Homes For Aged Men. And we know that there was one in Fall River actually. They also had a children's home for orphaned children.

Q. Did he talk as though he was intending to make a will?
A. I judged from that he was intending to, I drew my conclusions that he had not, but was thinking of it.

Q. Did he mention the bequests outside he thought he should make?
A. He did not.

Q. How came he to be speaking about it?
A. Common conversation, I suppose, same as about his land. Before he bought the Birch land, I was down there with him. He says lets go up Main street. We went up. He says "here is a piece of property, don't say anything about it, I have got a chance to buy. What is your opinion about it?"? I asked what it could be bought for. I don't know as he told me direct, but about. I says "I think it is a good property in the heart of the city. The city will be coming towards it all the time. I believe it will be a good investment." Several months afterward, one Sunday, he says "John I did as you told me." I says "what is that?" I forgot all about it. "I bought that Birch land."

Q. I wish you would recall the conversation about the will as as explicitly as you have this.
A. That is all he said about the will, he thought of making some bequests out, you know, for charitable purposes. His farm over there, he was talking about the Old Ladies Home, "I don't know but I would give them this, if they would take it."

History of Fall River / prepared under the direction of a committee of prominent citizens appointed by His Honor Mayor John T. Coughlin by Henry M. Fenner, A. B., assisted by Benjamin Buffinton. -- New York : F. T. Smiley Publishing Co., 1906

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Last edited by Allen on Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

"He who cannot put his thoughts on ice should not enter into the head of dispute." - Friedrich Nietzsche

I have always found this interesting. I found a birth record for an Eliza B. Borden born in Fall River Massachusetts on February 12, 1851 to Andrew J. and Sarah A. Borden. The father is listed as being a cabinet maker, which we know Andrew was a cabinet maker. This is how he is listed in census records and in various other records. The parents being Andrew J. Borden and Sarah A. Borden, and the child being born the same year as Emma, seems like a huge coincidence. I thought someone had mentioned this coincidence a long time ago on the board but I have not found any information yet. The father is listed as born in Massachusetts, and the mother in Tiverton, Rhode Island. According to what we know Sarah Anthony Morse was also born in Massachusetts. Was Emma originally Eliza, or was there another Andrew J. and Sarah A. Borden who had a child in 1851 in Fall River?

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

"He who cannot put his thoughts on ice should not enter into the head of dispute." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Allen wrote:I have always found this interesting. I found a birth record for an Eliza B. Borden born in Fall River Massachusetts on February 12, 1851 to Andrew J. and Sarah A. Borden. The father is listed as being a cabinet maker, which we know Andrew was a cabinet maker. This is how he is listed in census records and in various other records. The parents being Andrew J. Borden and Sarah A. Borden, and the child being born the same year as Emma, seems like a huge coincidence. I thought someone had mentioned this coincidence a long time ago on the board but I have not found any information yet. The father is listed as born in Massachusetts, and the mother in Tiverton, Rhode Island. According to what we know Sarah Anthony Morse was also born in Massachusetts. Was Emma originally Eliza, or was there another Andrew J. and Sarah A. Borden who had a child in 1851 in Fall River?

I actually sent away for my own copies of birth, death, and marriage certificates of many of the people involved in Lizzie's life. (As well as both copies of the death certificates for William S. Borden.) I have one for Alice Esther Borden. She would have been the second oldest of the Borden children if she had lived.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

"He who cannot put his thoughts on ice should not enter into the head of dispute." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Allen wrote:One thing I've always found interesting is that 1906 Emma took a trip to Scotland. I have wondered why she waited to take this trip until after she left Maplecroft. She never did live alone either. Interesting also because neither did John Morse. I think they enjoyed the companionship. Lizzie did not seem to care about having anyone else in her home but her servants.

Hey Allen, and others, where did you find all these historical pieces? It's great!

"Mr. Morse, when you were told for the THIRD time that Abby and Andrew had been killed, why did you pronounce a "WHAT" to Mrs. Churchill? Why?"

Allen wrote:I know this question has been asked before. I have changed my mind about this many times. It's one of the questions in this case that I can't seem to settle on an answer for because there doesn't seem to be one. Why do you think that Emma left Maplecroft never to return? Anyone have any ideas? I know it was after talking to Reverend Buck that Emma decided to finally leave. I've read somewhere that the people of Fall River didn't hold either Reverend Buck or Jubb in very high regard. After all those years of mothering Lizzie, what drove Emma over the edge?

From everything I've read, Emma was more of the retiring of the two, and lizzie was enjoying herself. Emma got a belly full of the partying and what not and left.

Suicide is painless It brings on many changes and I will take my leave when I please.

Allen wrote:One thing I've always found interesting is that 1906 Emma took a trip to Scotland. I have wondered why she waited to take this trip until after she left Maplecroft. She never did live alone either. Interesting also because neither did John Morse. I think they enjoyed the companionship. Lizzie did not seem to care about having anyone else in her home but her servants.

Hey Allen, and others, where did you find all these historical pieces? It's great!

I have amassed a lot of documentation over the years. I've obtained it through several great sources. Many of my documents have been found via the Massachusetts vital statistics office, the local county libraries and court houses are a wealth of information, newspaper archives, contemporary books and articles, other local offices in Fall River and the surrounding areas, and a very great genealogy site that has copies of the actual documents available.

"He who cannot put his thoughts on ice should not enter into the head of dispute." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Pretty good suggestions that would fit in with the time period. What if Emma was the one that did it? After year's of secrecy, she finally confessed to Lizzie. Upon hearing this and all of the problems it created in her life...Lizzie banished her.

The problem I have with anyone other than Lizzie being the killer is that Lizzie did not have an alibi for the time between when Andrew left that morning until his return. According to her Inquest testimony, she was in the house the entire time between Andrew leaving and his return. IMO, the alibi she gave for the time her father was murdered, is not, at all, realistic.

If Emma was the killer, then Lizzie HAD to have known her sister was the killer right from the get go. The same is true if Abby’s killer was an intruder; Lizzie had to have known who the killer was, she was in the house the entire time!

Some people have such a hard time believing that Lizzie could not have cleaned herself up, and hid the hatchet in the 15-20 minute time span that she claimed she was in the barn, but if Emma was the perpetrator, she had the same amount of time to clean up, and leave the premises undetected, with blood on her dress and carrying a bloody hatchet. Furthermore, how is it that no one saw her come or leave?

If an intruder were the perpetrator, that person had the same amount of time to leave the leave the premises undetected, wearing blood stained clothes and carrying a bloody hatchet. With all of the Second Street activity that was going on that day, along with the watchful eye of Mrs. Churchill, how is it that an intruder was not seem, by someone?

The problem I have with anyone other than Lizzie being the killer is that Lizzie did not have an alibi for the time between when Andrew left that morning until his return. According to her Inquest testimony, she was in the house the entire time between Andrew leaving and his return. IMO, the alibi she gave for the time her father was murdered, is not, at all, realistic.

If Emma was the killer, then Lizzie HAD to have known her sister was the killer right from the get go. The same is true if Abby’s killer was an intruder; Lizzie had to have known who the killer was, she was in the house the entire time!

Some people have such a hard time believing that Lizzie could not have cleaned herself up, and hid the hatchet in the 15-20 minute time span that she claimed she was in the barn, but if Emma was the perpetrator, she had the same amount of time to clean up, and leave the premises undetected, with blood on her dress and carrying a bloody hatchet. Furthermore, how is it that no one saw her come or leave?

If an intruder were the perpetrator, that person had the same amount of time to leave the leave the premises undetected, wearing blood stained clothes and carrying a bloody hatchet. With all of the Second Street activity that was going on that day, along with the watchful eye of Mrs. Churchill, how is it that an intruder was not seem, by someone?

I agree Twins. I have a hard time believing that anyone swallowed her excuses about how she did not know two brutal axe murders had taken place right under her nose. She put herself in the kitchen for the majority of the morning, which was within direct sight of any intruder trying to sneak in the side door.

And about that 20 minutes. I've showered, shaved, and been ready for work in less than that time.

Consider this, as I'm in agreement with Twins, any intruder who committed the murders had the same time frame for getting cleaned up that Lizzie would have had. Then they would have had to get away in front of a street full of witnesses. So, yes, cleaning up in that time frame is possible because someone did actually do it. The murderer, no matter who it was, had the same tight window of time before Lizzie called Bridget downstairs.

But, an intruder unknown to Lizzie had an even tighter time frame than 15-20 minutes. They had to get out before Lizzie had discovered Andrew's body. If you buy that bunk about her being in the dusty barn for 20 minutes, while eating pears, and coming out clean and pristine.

I agree, KG; you make some very good points. I have never understood why some people feel that 20 minutes was not enough time for Lizzie to have cleaned up, and hid the weapon before calling for Bridget. 20 minutes is a long time, especially when the killer is focused on killing. Furthermore, some people believe that the killer would have been covered with blood, but that just isn't true. I firmly believe the reason there was very little blood is because the first blows administrated to both Abby and Andrew were fatal blows, which means their hearts would have stopped beating, and therefore their blood would have stopped flowing through their bodies.

The fact that Lizzie’s hands were lily-white in appearance, is a huge red flag for me. According to witnesses, Lizzie looked pristine, she did not have a hair out of place, nor were there any smudges on her clothes, and her hands were lily-white. Lizzie hands were just TOO CLEAN!

Lizzie changed her testimony at the Inquest, regarding when she ate the 3 pears she claimed to have picked up while on her way to the barn. At first she testified that she ate the pears after digging through the box looking for sinkers.

Q. I asked you to tell me all you did.
A. I told you all I did.
Q. Do you mean to say you stopped your work, and then, additional to that, sat still and ate some pears?
A. While I was looking out of the window, yes sir.

Q. To look in that box that you have described the size of on the bench and put down the curtain and then get out as soon as you conveniently could; would you say you were occupied in that business twenty minutes?
A. I think so, because I did not look at the box when I first went up.
Q. What did you do?
A. I ate my pears.
Q. Stood there eating the pears, doing nothing?
A. I was looking out of the window.
Q. Stood there, looking out of the window, eating the pears?
A. I should think so.
Q. How many did you eat?
A. Three, I think.

If Lizzie had eaten the pears after she had been scrounging around in a box, looking for sinkers, then her hands would have been covered with rust, dust and dirt. (Yummy! Those pears must have tasted absolutely awesome with such dirty hands. YUCK!) But, if she had eaten the pears before rummaging around in the barn while looking for sinkers, then her hands would have been caked with sticky pear juice, which would have made the rust, dust and dirt stick to her hands even more. Whether she ate the pears before or after looking for the sinkers, she would have wanted to wash her hands, wouldn't she?

At the Inquest, Hosea Knowlton did an in-depth questioning of what Lizzie did the day of the murders. He was persist in asking her to tell him everything she did on the morning of the 4th. At no time did Lizzie state in her testimony that she had washed her hands. I firmly believe that if Lizzie remembered that she laid down her hat when she supposedly came in from the barn, then she would have certainly remembered that she had washed her hands!

We need to take the inconveniences of the Borden household under consideration in determining how much Lizzie might have accomplished in 20 minutes. We have showers; she didn't. She may have had a wash basin or two at the ready beforehand, maybe downcellar, complete with a fresh outfit to change into. She might have managed her finishing touches upstairs in her room. <shudder>

By the bye, pears aren't all that sticky. You're so right, though, that her omission of stopping to wash her hands in the kitchen was a tell, as was handling her hat before doing so, unless it was a ratty old thing. I doubt Lizzie had anything ratty. ;)

Precisely. In terms of what can be accomplished our twenty minutes are very different from twenty minutes in 1892. How can we compare them? Our own domestic conveniences offer speedier actions.

Personally, though, I'm troubled by that estimation of the time available. It's predicated on Bridget's telling the truth, and the blithe acceptance of Sullivan's account is something I never can fathom. There is nothing in Bridget's evidence which can be corroborated by anyone other than Lizzie - potentially, problematically - and least of all the time she says it was when she says Lizzie called to her up those two flights of stairs. Rather, shouldn't we be calculating this tranche of available time purely and strictly on testimony external to the house? - that is, independent of Lizzie and Bridget's evidence? Thus, the minutes running from the time Borden is seen entering the house to the moment Mrs Churchill observes Lizzie in the doorway? And even then we have more time elapsing while Mrs Churchill, before she enters and sees anything herself, crosses Second Street to summon help.

All estimates of time can only be approximations but there's another thing I always find troubling: The blood observed to be issuing from Borden's skull even after the arrival of the police.

Pear juice... They always had 'hankies' on them in those days... They thought the world would end without a hanky in their pocket. Couldn't Lizzie just clean juice off her fingers with her handkerchief? And the pump in the barn? I'm not arguing for her innocence but the dirt-and-pearjuice doesn't seem a major hindrance to me. Also, many people have hands which visibly blanche as an effect of shock.

I agree that accepting Bridget's testimony at face value is a little disconcerting. Her answers have always stuck me as too neat and precise, maybe even coached. Who can remember that much detail, in order, with times given? I personally find Lizzie's sometimes confusing, contradictory memories and testimony more believable. I can remember mostly what I did this morning (it only being afternoon) but probably not in order and with the time. I live a few blocks from a church bell too; its useful sometimes but Bridget's either obsessively anal about time, coached in her testimony or lying, or a combination of those. It's weird and she's the only one that precise or consistent with no hesitation about it either of all witnesses. Maybe that's why the inquest testimony is missing...it didn't match to her carefully coached testimony at the trial. She wasn't overt about it, but clearly she was placing Lizzie (Lizzie giggling on the stairs next to her murdered step mom - after establishing the time that step mom was already dead) as the murderer.

Maybe Dane is right and Emma was banished. Because Emma left we all sort ASSUME that Lizzie was the problem. I think it safer to "assume" that the problem(s) or permanent separation was mutual for both Lizzie and Emma. They never communicated again, so neither tried to reconcile or contact each other, and both left each out of their wills. That's a pretty serious breach. I have a sister and we mostly fight like cats and dogs, but after a few months one or the other tries to make it better or reconnect.

I've long been of the opinion that Lizzie kicked Emma out, possibly as the result of the latter's chronic nagging about the former's behavior. I explain Emma's statements about Maplecroft having become "intolerable" (was that the word?) as a matter of saving face and making common cause with the many people of Fall River and environs who held Lizzie in no great regard. These were people, I believe (feel free to set me straight if I'm wrong) whose homes she may have needed to access while establishing herself somewhere permanently -- which she never did. This suggests that Emma left without funds to which she may have felt entitled, another argument in favor of her not having left of her own accord or with any warning that ouster was coming.

Last edited by Mara on Mon Jan 29, 2018 9:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

There is only one conclusion..., as I see it.
I am a Fall River native and have just joined this forum. I have had Lizzie in my mind and in my bones from a young age, as Manny Fall Riverites Do. The “finger pointing” in my opinion all lead to Emma. I have many reasons for believing Emma did it or hired someone to do it but here is the BIG and obvious one.
Account vary from Emma going to visit a sick friend to going to help a friend who has just had a baby. The destination also varies between Fairhaven and Marion, MA. None of this really matters. The point is, if we consider the time in question. In the day, one would have had to pack a large trunk for visiting for several days. There also would have to have been a carriage arriving or departing to and from 2nd Street, TWICE! A carriage ride to either destination would have taken a minimum of 2 hours, probably more. There is no discussion of any preparation or transportation for this trip. Furthermore, how was Emma informed of the murders and back in Fall River by the early afternoon investigations. There is NO explanation for this whatsoever. No talk of the hustle and bustle that would have set the tone for Emma, her belongings, and her transportation on the morning in question. There is also no talk of a commotion upon her return unpacking, a carriage for her return, etc. it is simply NOT POSSIBLE!
Add to this that Emma had left Fall River to go to College. She was a graduate of my Alma Mater, Wheaton College, a Woman’s College at the time ( both at the time of her attendance and mine ) in Norton, Ma. Emma had a glimpse of the world, Lizzie’s aspirations only went as far as the Fall River Highland’s. “How you gonna keep ‘em down on the farm after they’ve seen Paris”. Wether she wanted out of Fall River or simply control or emancipation she had a much broader experience. She also was older and Lizzie was favored. If $$$ be the motivation Emma had it, Lizzie did not. Lizzie would have and was “ sitting in the same church, simply changing pews “ someone else, meaning Emma still held Lizzie’s purse strings. Emma also did not want to call attention by living at Maplecroft and eventually fled the city of her crime. Lizzie did not. I am not sure wether they were thick as thieves and Lizzie knew or not but Emma had all the reasons, resentments and resourcefulness Lizzie lacked. Lizzie the typical spoiled, self centered, sassy irresponsible younger sister took the “scapegoat” rap. Emma stood by her side. Lizzie was not even mature enough to take things seriously and hold accountability for her own defense. I say Emma, Emma, Emma!
Not to mention Lizzie was quite diminutive in form where Emma had the larger size making the physical force needed to wield the murder weapon more likely. Nothing has ever been brought forward, to the best of my knowledge, to show if Emma was ever questioned at any length other than regarding Lizzie. One dubious account that she arrived at her destination, not real corroboration. This account is not even plausible.
Let’s look at the time line:
- 9:00-9:30 A.M. Abby Borden murdered
-11:00-11:30 A.M. Andrew Murdered
- 11:30-12:00 P.M. Word is out and investigations begin
- Emma, perhaps is sent word
- 1:30-2:00P.M. Earliest Emma would get word
3:30-4:00 P.M. Earliest Emma could have returned
There is no way Emma’s alibi is plausible. She did not have the time! If a carriage had come, however, she would have had time to leave and get rid of the murder weapon.
I say, there was never any trip. Please post comments. -L.J.

Forgive me if I misunderstand but I don't think anyone has claimed Emma set off to Fairhaven on the 4th of August and got back again all the same day. In a carriage, 'TWICE!'
She and Lizzie went to New Bedford on Thursday July the 21st. Emma then lodged a precise fortnight just across the river in Fairhaven, where the Lizzie-Bowen telegram found her the day of the killings. It's Lizzie who's sailing off Marion on the 26th of July according to newspaper social columns.
You say 'None of this really matters'. It does matter, surely.

I've not yet encountered a sick friend or newborn baby as the reason for Emma's Fairhaven visit. Her hosts are two none-too-well-off women in their 'seventies and 'fifties, Rebecca Brownell and a spinster daughter, Helen Brownell. Emma planned to 'stay out the summer' there, but it sounds such an un-fun vacation one wonders if Emma fled Second Street after some bad family drama. There's nothing to suggest these impecunious people could be friends of hers - in fact they didn't even own a house, they lived with Rebecca's brother. Did Emma need to get out of her own house but had no friends for recourse?

The same can be said of Lizzie's six days in New Bedford. Her landlady Nancy Poole isn't someone we'd expect her to know as a friend, she wasn't on the same financial footing. However, Officer Medley got told that Nancy's married daughter Augusta had been a 'shoolmate' of Lizzie's.
Augusta Tripp was some 2 years older than Lizzie, and she grew up in Westport.Would a Westport girl go to a Fall River school? To Lizzie's school? Her dead father had been a 'pedlar' and the widowed Nancy made ends meet as a sempstress.
It's true Augusta had been a schoolteacher before marriage - is that how Lizzie knew her?
In any case, Augusta the 'schoolmate' didn't live in New Bedford, and Lizzie didn't see her until she left New Bedford.

The why of the New Bedford visit - which seems peculiarly pointless on the face of it and smacks of desperation - may well be a big clue as to what was happening in the Borden sisters' lives just before the murders.
So it's a pity no-one enquired more at the time.

It's none of it the highest form of evidence but it's all there is: Officer Medley hurried to New Bedford and this is what he was told. The dates of the Borden sisters' arrival and Lizzie's departure, and - like blood from a stone - an almost-nothing account of Lizzie's stay. She hung around the house for almost six days and spent '31 minutes' shopping! With Emma in Fairhaven it's even less satisfactory - we depend on a few words Mrs Brownell gave reporters. Whether the police did or did not check on Emma's whereabouts - and there's nothing to say they did - they presumably saw no point in pursuing the matter.

Last edited by InterestedReader on Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:25 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Welcome, Lori. Your perspective as a resident of Fall River will be most interesting to read. Please share all you will.

I never thought of Emma as more worldy than Lizzie but her education might well have opened her mind to greater options. But ddn’t Lizzie travel to Europe with church group? She wasn’t entirely sheltered from outside infouences. Your theory is certainly interesting enough to examine — let’s hear more!

There is only one conclusion..., as I see it.
I am a Fall River native and have just joined this forum. I have had Lizzie in my mind and in my bones from a young age, as Manny Fall Riverites Do. The “finger pointing” in my opinion all lead to Emma. I have many reasons for believing Emma did it or hired someone to do it but here is the BIG and obvious one.
Account vary from Emma going to visit a sick friend to going to help a friend who has just had a baby. The destination also varies between Fairhaven and Marion, MA. None of this really matters. The point is, if we consider the time in question. In the day, one would have had to pack a large trunk for visiting for several days. There also would have to have been a carriage arriving or departing to and from 2nd Street, TWICE! A carriage ride to either destination would have taken a minimum of 2 hours, probably more. There is no discussion of any preparation or transportation for this trip. Furthermore, how was Emma informed of the murders and back in Fall River by the early afternoon investigations. There is NO explanation for this whatsoever. No talk of the hustle and bustle that would have set the tone for Emma, her belongings, and her transportation on the morning in question. There is also no talk of a commotion upon her return unpacking, a carriage for her return, etc. it is simply NOT POSSIBLE!
Add to this that Emma had left Fall River to go to College. She was a graduate of my Alma Mater, Wheaton College, a Woman’s College at the time ( both at the time of her attendance and mine ) in Norton, Ma. Emma had a glimpse of the world, Lizzie’s aspirations only went as far as the Fall River Highland’s. “How you gonna keep ‘em down on the farm after they’ve seen Paris”. Wether she wanted out of Fall River or simply control or emancipation she had a much broader experience. She also was older and Lizzie was favored. If $$$ be the motivation Emma had it, Lizzie did not. Lizzie would have and was “ sitting in the same church, simply changing pews “ someone else, meaning Emma still held Lizzie’s purse strings. Emma also did not want to call attention by living at Maplecroft and eventually fled the city of her crime. Lizzie did not. I am not sure wether they were thick as thieves and Lizzie knew or not but Emma had all the reasons, resentments and resourcefulness Lizzie lacked. Lizzie the typical spoiled, self centered, sassy irresponsible younger sister took the “scapegoat” rap. Emma stood by her side. Lizzie was not even mature enough to take things seriously and hold accountability for her own defense. I say Emma, Emma, Emma!
Not to mention Lizzie was quite diminutive in form where Emma had the larger size making the physical force needed to wield the murder weapon more likely. Nothing has ever been brought forward, to the best of my knowledge, to show if Emma was ever questioned at any length other than regarding Lizzie. One dubious account that she arrived at her destination, not real corroboration. This account is not even plausible.
Let’s look at the time line:
- 9:00-9:30 A.M. Abby Borden murdered
-11:00-11:30 A.M. Andrew Murdered
- 11:30-12:00 P.M. Word is out and investigations begin
- Emma, perhaps is sent word
- 1:30-2:00P.M. Earliest Emma would get word
3:30-4:00 P.M. Earliest Emma could have returned
There is no way Emma’s alibi is plausible. She did not have the time! If a carriage had come, however, she would have had time to leave and get rid of the murder weapon.
I say, there was never any trip. Please post comments. -L.J.

Hello, Lori,

I have a fews thoughts on your theory. As Wendy stated, Emma was in Fairhaven visiting with the aged Brownells after a brief stop in New Bedford. She remained there until the day of the murders. The accounts of going to see a sick friend involve the step mother, Abby Borden. Lizzie told police that on the day of the murders Abby had received a note calling her to the Bedside of a sick friend. Emma never went to Marion. It was Lizzie who visited at Marion and was supposed to vacation there at Dr. Handy's cottage. I do not think that the police questioned Emma as they should have. I think that since she was out of town during the commission of the crime they felt she had little to offer the investigation. Sloppy police work.

Emma did not travel by carriage. She took the train.

There is explanation given by several witnesses in testimony that Lizzie asked Dr. Bowen to send Emma a telegram in Fairhaven. So she did receive word. According to Emma's testimony she was on the train that left New Bedford at 3:40 pm. She arrived home at around 5:00 pm that evening. Traveling with trunks was the norm back. Everyone was prepared to handle this the same as you are prepared to handle traveling with suitcases.

The investigations that Emma was present for occurred over the following days, like Saturday, not on the day of the murders.

Emma did go to Wheaton. She did not graduate, however. Lizzie had literally seen Paris. Andrew sent her on a 19 week tour of Europe in 1890.

Emma did not control Lizzie's money. If she had Lizzie would've had a pretty rough go of it after Emma left and they never had any contact ever again. There also probably would not have been any parties thrown at Maplecroft for Nance O'Neill. Lizzie did as she pleased. I'm not sure why Emma would have had to have been in charge of Lizzie's finances since Lizzie was already in her 30's.

Last edited by KGDevil on Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:04 am, edited 1 time in total.